[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-899?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13732148#comment-13732148
]
Xuan Gong commented on YARN-899:
--------------------------------
Thanks for the comments. Sandy.
bq.We should go with an approach that generalizes for all schedulers.
Yes, we should do that. How about using a more generalized type : Queue. Looks
like that Queue is the super type for all the csqueue, FSQueue, and queue used
in all three schedulers.
bq.Queue submission ACLs are enforced internally by the schedulers on
addApplication. Would it make sense to use a similar approach with
removeApplication? If not, the submission ACLs should probably be modified to
use whatever mechanism is added.
We can do that
bq.In MR1, did the administer ACLs control who could view jobs in a queue? My
impression was that they only controlled who could kill jobs and change their
priorities.
Yes, based on the documentation, it shows "queue administrators of the queue to
which the job was submitted to (mapred.queue.queue-name.acl-administer-jobs)
always have access to view and modify a job ".
> Get queue administration ACLs working
> -------------------------------------
>
> Key: YARN-899
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-899
> Project: Hadoop YARN
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: scheduler
> Affects Versions: 2.1.0-beta
> Reporter: Sandy Ryza
> Assignee: Xuan Gong
> Attachments: YARN-899.1.patch
>
>
> The Capacity Scheduler documents the
> yarn.scheduler.capacity.root.<queue-path>.acl_administer_queue config option
> for controlling who can administer a queue, but it is not hooked up to
> anything. The Fair Scheduler could make use of a similar option as well.
> This is a feature-parity regression from MR1.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
